Amendment decision Penal Code In force in our country since 1921 It is a fundamental opportunity for a society that has been demanding for decades the re-establishment of the legal system and the power of the state against crime. This is not just a technical update or administrative compilation, it is discussed Coexistence model What we want from now on. After many years, the disastrous vision of abolishing the death penalty was reinforced by the former judge Eugenio ZavaroniPlacing the perpetrator at the center of the state’s concerns, it finally opens up the possibility of zero tolerance for those who break the law and returning victims to the place from which they were never meant to be removed due to partisan ideological issues, turning them into outcasts of the system.
The possibility now finally exists to have zero tolerance for those who violate the law and to return victims to the place from which they should never have been turned away on partisan ideological issues, turning them into pariahs of the system.
Proposes a government project Three times the articulation From the current law by merging the currently widespread crimes into special laws: the solution that Many sanctions experts consider it essential To provide cohesion to the system, while others prefer Keep these standards separate for analytical accuracy. Despite this, there is sufficient consensus that the current fragmentation has generated difficulty of interpretation and legal uncertainty in many cases, and that the time has come for a clear decision.
The proposed reform seeks to achieve three clearly defined general objectives: toughening penalties, expanding the scope of conduct punishable by law, and reviewing the statute of limitations, release and aggravated numbers. It is estimated that these last points are the point where the debate will be most difficult.
There is sufficient consensus that the current dispersion of standards has generated interpretive difficulty and legal uncertainty in many cases; It is time to make a clear decision
Regarding the new crimes, the government is seeking to include aggravated murder; sexual assault; Production, marketing and distribution of child sexual abuse material; Corruption of minors; Encouraging and facilitating prostitution and exploitation; kidnapping of minors for sexual purposes; human trafficking; kidnapping; Attacks on the constitutional order and against the democratic system; Operations against criminal organizations, terrorism and its financing.
As well as cases of sexual harassment at work, teaching or nursery; The pyramid scheme is Grooming; And other characters such as the actions of “motochuros” or “black widows” or attacks in demonstrations of aggravated scope. This collection reveals the true dimension of social change that the old law can no longer cover..
Regarding toughening penalties, the reform is clear: the minimum sentence for simple murder is 10 years and the maximum is 30 years, instead of the current 8 and 25 years. In the case of premeditated murder, the penalty is life imprisonment when the victims are the President of the Republic, the Chief of Staff, ministers, teachers, and children under 16 years of age or over 65 years of age. Likewise, if the crime occurred in a gathering place, educational or sports center, or on public roads, using weapons, vehicles, or other elements capable of causing the death of an unlimited number of people, or by order.
Minor injuries rise significantly; Child pornography is up to 12 years under aggravated circumstances; Robbery with violence 10; Theft extends to 3 years; Illegal carrying of weapons becomes non-parole, and corruption crimes, such as bribery, are aggravated for up to 15 years in the case of illicit enrichment and 10 years in the case of bribery. With these modifications, it is estimated that 82% of crimes have an effective penalty. The goal is clear: The state should stop being the guarantor of impunity.
The goal of reform is clear: that the state should not be the guarantor of impunity
There is an equally important fact that the project also thinks Rules that protect the actions of police officers. Although crime responds to multiple factors with complex solutions, having regulations that once again give these agents the necessary organizational support to be able to carry out their mission efficiently is undoubtedly a necessary start on the road to crime control, as well as a clear message of frustration with the unjust persecution and mistreatment they are subjected to in the performance of their duties.
The most controversial points are: Impermissibility. The government announced that some particularly serious crimes, such as aggravated murder, sexual crimes, trafficking and terrorism, would remain imprescriptible. However, it remains an open debate whether or not corruption crimes will be included in that list. Initially, the government chose to add it, but backed down in the last hours, even though it made it clear It is not ruled out that it will be established in the future. The discussion is not simple. There are those who warn of the dangers of extending the statute of limitations due to difficulties of proof and that trials remain endless processes, while others point out that only then Complicit bureaucracy and prolonged escapes are prevented from ensuring the extinction of the criminal enterprise.
We are already suffering at present from the inconveniences that arise from sentencing today for crimes committed more than 40 years ago, as is the case with crimes against humanity. Reconstructing events becomes extremely laborious, human memory naturally diminishes, and recognition of facial features and voices ceases to be a valid tool and In short, there is, as today, the risk of conviction without sufficient evidence.. It is also known that risk increases when social pressure on the type of crime is greater.
Possibility of eliminating the number Femicidewhich will be replaced by a general form of Aggravated homicide for reasons of hatred or gender violence. Experts should discuss whether the specificity of the term is necessary to make a structural phenomenon visible or whether its inclusion in broader categories avoids redundancy that has led to contradictory interpretations.
If agreeing to lower the referral age to 13 years, the state must ensure that detention centers for these juvenile offenders do not turn into dens of violence or schools of crime.
There is also no shortage of valid counterarguments in the case of versions. the Supreme Court of Justice He warned of the danger of creating categories of “unjustified” crimes, while human rights activists from various fields confirm that tightening penalties does not in itself guarantee a reduction in crime, and there are those who fear This rigidity is not accompanied by a prison system capable of avoiding the cycle of decline and relapse. Added to this last group are those who agree to lower the referral age to 13 years, and demand that the state ensure that the prison institutions that house these minors do not lead, as usual, to a nest of violence and lack of supervision. Without this prevention, they estimate that these centers would become, as we already know them, schools of crime, thus losing the purpose of resocialization.
After a century of partial reforms and decades of growing insecurity, Argentina needs a modern and coherent penal codeWhich pushes back the culture of chaos and puts the victim back at the center. We need a state that protects, a justice that works, and a legal system that is respected again. The parliamentary debate will be arduous, but necessary. You cannot build a free society when impunity reigns.